Those who harmed public media violated the law. Public media independence is enshrined in Polish law, and defending it is not a favor granted by those in power but a duty. The leaders of the democratic movement stressed that violations must be challenged in court and will be challenged in court. Public television must remain free from party influence and protected as a public good.
We have prepared several legal scenarios
During a Friday meeting with residents of Koszalin in the Western Pomeranian Voivodeship, the head of the Civic Platform, Donald Tusk, was asked about the fate of TVP after the elections and whether it would continue to serve as government television. He explained that there is a clear plan to free public television from today’s rulers and mercenaries because journalists are scarce there and those who remain appear to serve power rather than the public interest. He noted that several legal avenues have been prepared, each to be applied depending on the election outcome and the evolving situation, and one of the first decisions will be to restore proper governance of the public media.
Those who harmed the public media have breached the law. The role of public media is a constitutional and legal matter, and no one should expect favor when power is exercised at the expense of independence. Public television is currently seen as corrupted and operating against numerous laws and constitutional provisions related to public media, a point emphasized by the speaker. It was stated that public television should not be handed to any party and must remain under institutional control rather than political control. The chairman spoke firmly on this principle and reminded listeners that the project aims to protect media independence as a constitutional obligation.
He stressed that the party he leads is committed to this cause and will act to ensure that public media serves the whole public, not factional interests. The message conveyed was that preserving media independence is essential for a healthy democracy and that the public deserves access to information that is not manipulated by those in power.
The discussion then shifted to the role of the internet as a tool for fact checking. A young participant asked about TVP and whether it could regain credibility. The chairman recalled how public television functioned in the past, noting that there was criticism and there were people who openly opposed his politics who still did their jobs professionally. He emphasized that he did not seek to manually control public television, even if political outcomes might appear to favor opponents. The point was that media freedom requires structural guarantees rather than personal management. The response indicated a belief that media should reflect diverse viewpoints while remaining anchored in objective reporting.
In a candid exchange, the leader acknowledged that some people may mistake naïveté for leniency. He argued that such media can evolve toward a more accurate representation of reality, which would reduce the influence of harmful actors who distort information. The claim was that a genuinely independent public broadcaster would inoculate society against manipulation and would present options beyond a single propaganda channel.
According to the speaker, if public television had remained decent and independent, broader support for a governing party might have been different. He suggested that a healthy mix of information could have shifted the political landscape. He remarked that a portion of the population continues to rely on public television for information, even as other channels provide broader perspectives. The point was that freeing viewers from a single information stream would widen understanding and participation in democratic processes.
The paradox highlighted was that to remove the ruling party from power and restore public television to its rightful role, even the most loyal voters of that party would need access to a broader spectrum of information. The argument was that TVP Info and the current media environment have been used to promote a particular narrative, which has affected public perception and harmed the impartiality of the information landscape. The speaker asserted that television should be freed from the influence of those who distort truth for political ends.
Those responsible for the creation of the current media climate must answer to the public. The emphasis remained on returning public television to a constitutional mandate and removing undue party influence. The goal is to restore basic morality and decency in broadcasting, with a focus on safeguarding the constitution and the public interest rather than personal or partisan gains.
As the conversation turned to constitutional integrity, the chairman asserted that an eventual victory would bring a return to constitutional norms. He underscored that the aim is a straightforward restoration of legal and ethical standards that guide public life, avoiding grand promises and focusing on solid governance that upholds fundamental democratic principles.
Lis, Tusk, public media and a century of memory
Was public television particularly critical of Tusk during the Civic Platform dominated years? The speaker suggested that critics were often accused of bias, while supporters recall instances where the platform and its leader received intense scrutiny. A memorable moment cited involved a well-known media figure who reportedly praised the leadership in a celebratory manner during a program from many years prior, illustrating how perceptions of criticism have varied over time.
Interest in public opinion remains high. Some analyses show that opposition voters have varied levels of engagement with different media sources, and the relationship between party identification and media consumption can influence attitudes toward policy and leadership. Commentary on these dynamics has circulated on political portals and in public discourse, reflecting the ongoing tension between media ownership, political power, and public access to information.
Overall, the public discourse emphasizes a need for transparent reporting and responsible broadcasting, with attention to the historical context of media influence in national politics and the evolving role of new information platforms in shaping civic life.
Source material and ongoing commentary around these issues illustrate the complex landscape of public media reform and political accountability in the contemporary Polish media environment.